I'm afraid I don't see how your two-phase explanation answers the question. A cell is alive whether or not it's infected with a virus. The addition of virus particles doesn't make it any more or less alive (until the virus kills the cell). That doesn't really say anything about whether the virus is alive. You could just as well say that salt is not alive, but a cell containing salt is alive, so salt is a two-phase living organism. Which makes this concept far too broad to be a definition of what is alive, in my opinion.
salt wouldn't be alive because it does not reproduce or evolve. when one says that a cell is alive, this presupposes that it has genetic material allowing it to evolve and reproduce. a virus infected cell enables a virus to do just that.
I was thinking the same thing. Couldn't one argue that in the intracellular phase that the virus STILL isn't living, as it is the CELL that is providing all the necessary machinery and components for viral replication? The virus is essentially a piece of genetic material, and we certainly don't argue that DNA or RNA are alive just because they are found inside a cell. In the long run, it is really not an important question - viruses are important whether or not they are alive.
Umbert Lapagoss Perhaps salt isn’t the ideal example but his point is very valid. Just because it piggybacks onto something ALREADY living doesn’t mean it “becomes” alive cause many of the properties that define “life” are inherent to the cell itself and NOT the physical virus. the question of a virus infected cell being alive is NOT the same question as a Virus being alive.
@@ericlind6581 It coukd be a fundamental question of life or death, of what is known to be alive, meaning the cell. Is the cell/organism alive/ living? Once it ingests, incorporates, or is infected by a virus particle does it live or die?
@@anotherpointofview222 A virus is a NON-LIVING organism. That means it's dead. Dead things can't come back to life....unless they are zombies. Do you also believe in zombies?
This is an easy to understand introduction to this famous question, nicely done! I lean more toward the opinion offered by one of my former professors: Life is a term for poets and philosophers, not scientists. The philosophical question is a fun one, but from a scientific point of view maybe we're better off focusing on the chemistry and evolution of replicators instead of trying to distill some list of traits that will cover the whole bunch. And viruses are certainly evolving replicators that undergo biological chemistry…
like your videos but this is a very stupid comment i'm sorry, scientists have to have a definition on what life is because biological scientists study life
If your brain was somehow implanted with an instruction manual on how to make a copy of the instruction manual, and forces you to make so many copies of the instruction manual that you die of suffocating in instruction manuals what was alive? You or the instruction manual that you were forced to make copies of because all you could think about was making instruction manuals since it was implanted in your brain? The answer is, viruses, no matter what their state are not alive.
I have enjoyed your virology lectures and posts, wonderful and accessible! Keep sharing your great gift for teaching and supporting online access to science. Thank you.
@@jakejones5736 bacteria do not need to be parasite to be alive, virus like seed, if not attached or inside targeted cell, they're dormant and like a thing
If in the particular stage the virus is said not to be alive then how does the virus sustain itself outside of the cell for varying amount of time on different surfaces.? Did we fall short on our definition of what constitutes a cell, the outer casing in which the RNA is housed , what is it called, what's it made off? ...JUST BEING INQUISITIVE...
@Robert Lee, Countertenor Yes. I listened to a virologist tell his students "do not anthropomorphise viruses," giving them human qualities and referring to them as having human attributes they don't have. So now I notice how much people do that and how it can cause you to think or believe things about viruses that may not be true. Check it out if interested. Just 10 minutes of it will be very informative. He makes it interesting not boring. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-lj3NhPgOoX4.html Virology 2020 Columbia University Professor
@Robert Lee, Countertenor Unfortunately, even though viruses can’t move on their own, they have stupid people spreading them around the globe (like the people who claim that scientists say that viruses jump from one continent to another).
Ok so when the virus infected cell starts making more virus particles, does it project those virus particles out through the cell membrane or does it reproduce another virus infected cell, or both?
Hi, this is a remarkable video. I have read the book by Addy Pros "What's Life" and I think he made very nice points there. The concept of DKS is a very important concept to consider if we are to tackle this question. Watching your video,I became confused as to how a non-living structure like the virus particle goes around infecting cells or, for that matter, doing any thing ..? .. I think viruses are not just dead. .. :)
I keep hearing the experts saying that viruses aren't living things, they just need a host to survive and reproduce; AND that they survive for a certain amount of time on certain surfaces. Doesn't saying survive and reproducing imply something living? Another question: If they aren't alive, are they programmed to do what they do? If so, who is programming them and what purpose?
@soro vision Does anyone know how long the virus can exist out there in the world without a host to invade. If they have a short lifespan it seems like we would be able to get rid of this thing fairly quick. If it starts getting warm soon that would also help, right? I hate playing this strategy war game with an enemy I can't see and can invade me without even knowing it.
@soro vision I'm not sure what point you were trying to make about the CDC Death Reporting requirements. I read the document. It was very informative and insightful. However I greatly appreciated and took comfort in knowing your knowledge of The Way. "I AM, the Way, the Truth, and the Life." ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-WDEBz25lGdY.html
I understand the debate and also this type of explanation. To me, this explanation seems like an analogy for a spore/seed-plant mechanism; a seed in itself is not alive, but with the right conditions it becomes alive. Of course, there are more questions; for example, if the cell eventually dies, then, why the mechanism? Reading other explanations, I thought about the virus as a defense mechanism or a poisonous protein; could these apply?
In the debate over living vs not, if anything will be alive then calling it a seed or parasite is trivial to what it will become. How it evolved is still more interesting.
Summed up: Viruses aren't alive Cells are. Note this video made it seem like cells are only alive woth viruses in them which isn't true but I'll give it a pass bevause I know better
Life is a symphony, a party, a dance of different various molecules. A virus is alone, it doesn't do what cells do, it doesn't produce what cells produce. If you take a step back and try to realise, if you could hear the molecules of cells, a virus doesn't create this symphony or dance. Also cells have a baby stage and a mature stage, all living things do, living things breathe or exchange, inhale, exhale, or excreate, living things are uniquely reliant on water, require water in one way or another. Maybe start there. Instead of using linear thinking and what is only visible to define life.
Good point so a virus is a "primitive non-water based life form, which parasites on water-based life forms to reproduce". Opposite to a bacteria which takes from the body and gives something back to the body.
@@deanmuhl7417 The myth here is that this professor and many others have the the right definition of living systems but in fact they don't have it. The mentioned 6 criterias or conditions are not a DEFINITION.
So, could a virus be similar to a plant seed or a pollin in some ways? What is the best method of destroying a virus so that it cannot function and cause infection? Certainly they cannot be indestructible.
Mark are you asking How like in how it was actually made? Do you think someone watching these videos really knows how a virus particle is made? But to use your word created in relation to a concept I believe in, a virus was created by the Creator of everything else created that man didn't create himself.
I think it's better to think of a virus as active and inactive. I had chickenpox as a child which was an active viral infection. I recovered and had no more symptoms but we know chickenpox can come back as shingles so between the time of recovery and shingles the virus is inactive not dead.
Yes, each cell has specific bandwidth and frequency within and at which sympathetic resonance can occur; influencing the cell for good and bad, including destruction. Works with everything
Are the Novel corona virus is alive and that's is true when a people is stay inside the home for two week as a result there is no human in streets or markets and the novel corona virus is no host cell and then the NCV are controlled or died plz reply must??
If it isn't alive before coming in contact with cells, why there is time period like aerosols for up to three hours, up to four hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard and up to two to three days on plastic and stainless steel ?
Have you got any real footage or images? The only ones I can find are CGI or a picture taken of a model that someone has made. Like the one in your hands.
Hi, so I have question about viruses. Do viruses need energy for certain things, if yes where do they get this energy from and why can't they generate their own energy? Senna
Some scientists think that along time ago when life was just forming viruses separated from the DNA or RNA (we used rna too) of the organism because the DNA or RNA started to replicate and eventually became its own thing over time Edit: I hope you understand this
I really like your definition. So simple so deep. Drawing a distinction between VIRUS and "VIRUS INFECTED CELL". Would you like to comment on thinking of viruses as CELL'S MESSAGES? Therefore the argue of whether virus is alive of dead drop automatically.
I start to think our definition of lifeform have some problem and need to modify. The current definition was made as we lack of some knowledge by far we have understood. Virus might be the key to understand the real meaning between lifeform and inanimate things. Though it lack of many basic lifeform definition, it clearly evolve/mutates to suit the new environment and know how could find best place for survival. If it just non-living thing it won’t evolve from animal infection to another different host
Speaking as a professional armchair biologist I completely disagree, or rather I think the parameters for what constitutes "life" are arbitrary. Whether or not it has a cell, whether or not it makes energy, whether or not it grows, the means through which the virus produces more of itself or the means (or lack thereof) it has to interact with its environment are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned, the only thing that matters to me is can it reproduce and can it evolve, and the answer to those are yes, the fact that its method of doing so is as an obligate intercellular parasite is again, irrelevant. To my mind viruses are some of the simplest forms of life possible, and I spit on any trained professional who's studied the topic for years who disagrees with me. So there!
If I accidentally shoot myself in the head with a nail gun, and the nail hits the creative part of my brain and somehow makes me want to make carpenter nails for a living, is that nail considered alive then?
@@jakejones5736 I'm pretty certain that a virus doesn't operate under it's own power. Duplication is done by the cell and no physical part is carried over in that process. The rest is left to random chance.
I am a big fan of twiv and twim. However, to state that living things are required to make energy seems to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps it should be phrased "make use of or convert/store energy?"
I'm searching for that answer too... If it can only be alive inside a cell then how is the corona virus particle getting into people's cell? Would it not need it be injected into the person to reach their cell?
They don't "live" in the air. It's moreso they maintain their ability to become activated, If they come into contact with a host cell. It's a piece of code, that becomes activated and executes/ runs its instructions (genetic material/rna) after its installed (infects) inside a cell, that possesses the biological "hardware" needed to run the viruses pre programmed application. *To put it in pseudo computer terms.
But how viruses know that needs cells to duplicate??how viruses know the path to invade cells?And viruses have brain to think?too many questions with out answers
In the same way that all the cells in your body "know" what to do in their own environment - it's the chemistry and physics behind their interactions. Evolution by fluke mutation meant they did that instead of reproduce on their own.
3:00 He defines a virus as an organism with two phases..... organism..... as someone wrote in another comment this question is better left for poets and philosophers. Racaniello struck out in this video, imho...
The definition of life has come a long way. It’s no longer the narrow description we learned in high school. I wouldn’t know how to answer the question. We still have a lot to learn. I think it’s ok to say “I don’t know”.
Suppose that you wrote a computer program and it contained bugs ie errors. Suppose also a faulty ram, can happen. What is the propability that if you left the computer running for couple of millions of years that a random program could evolve properties we usually associate with alive 'things' ? Well cells rely on chemistry but not in cryptographic math. There is really a need to assign intent and we cannot fathom random processes. So are viruses chemical bugs in 'cell building' ? Since those things are evolved and not designed should we expect bugs ?
Look it's an interesting question.,..how long can a virus exist outside a host,..,and inside a cell it behaves like regular organic material,,...in fact looks and behaves and engages like regular biomechical systems..it's like asking the question ..what is electricity...
A virus needs a host called Cell, humans need a host called Planet. The write definition is: Is a virus alive from our point of view? No. Is a virus alive from an objective point of view: Yes and No, as everything.
i think it is possible for cells to go into a paused state, where they dont spend any energy, and come back alive when they get water. like it happens in case of tardigrades. but still as you said, this although a different mechanism, but still looks similar to viruses. great question, i hope professor answers this.
The first criteria you set for life is a non sequitur. By saying one or more, you encompass all cells, and a cell is just another word for box, cubicle, enclousre, and so on. the point about evolving is also subject to scrutiny in my book, because changing form doesn't require volition, as in consciousness. This happens to molecules all the time, and it's because of electricity. You could say that electrons are living beings by that criteria. How can you call it an organism when it doesn't meet any of your own criteria set for life? That's criminally negligent. It seems to me that cells eat these protein capsules for the protein, and then get dissolved, or not, by the acid, RNA, which is inside of the ... virus, exosome, particle, whatever you want to call these multituduous, if that's a word, particles, and that this only occurs if the acid inside of this semi-biotic thingy is potent enough to dissolve an entire cell. I don't think that drinking bleach is good for you, and, I, likewise, recognize that an alkaline environment in a living thing is more robust to tackle outside influence, as is proved by the fact that most plants are alkaline, and meats acidic - plants can withstand attacks from microorganisms to a much greater degree because of having a hard outer shell, and the ability to withdraw water and nutrition from soil, which is absolutely teeming with microorganisms.
